News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Intel Responds to Complaints About Microcode Benchmarking... by geezerjay on Thursday August 23, 2018 @01:51PM (#17829254)
> the poster speculated that it was the EULA for a beta version of the microcode

I don't see how this changes anything at all.

Re:Intel Responds to Complaints About Microcode Benchmarking... by SolarNet on Thursday August 23, 2018 @01:59PM (#17829325)
If they had given it to specific companies before it was finished the benchmarks would not represent reality while it was under development, and as part of the embargo on these beta clients, they wouldn't be allowed to publish it.

Obviously not good if it makes it into the public release.

Re:Intel Responds to Complaints About Microcode Benchmarking... by Sohcahtoa82 on Thursday August 23, 2018 @02:25PM (#17829534)
Because people are irrational and clickbait runs rampant.

If they contract testing of the beta to a 3rd party, they don't want them running benchmarks because if they get released, news organizations will jump on it, broadcasting the performance hit.

This matters because when later beta versions improve performance, the news about the improved performance doesn't spread nearly as much. Even if it does, the first impression sticks, and there's nothing Intel will be able to do about it.

Re:Intel Responds to Complaints About Microcode Benchmarking... by SmellyGeekBoy on Thursday August 23, 2018 @05:31PM (#17830855)
Amazing how many people are still doing mental gymnastics to give Intel the benefit of the doubt. This should have stopped being the default position a while ago.
Re:Intel Responds to Complaints About Microcode Benchmarking... by kikoreis on Thursday August 23, 2018 @01:58PM (#17829309)
If it's a limited access beta version, restricting redistribution and benchmark publishing makes a lot more sense.